Hagan endorsement fibs and offends

The Chronicle Editorial Board continues to discredit itself with its election commentary, most recently in its Oct. 22 endorsement of Kay Hagan for Senate.

The board, composed I suspect of largely state transplants, has the audacity to question the "state loyalty" of a sitting U.S. Senator. Could an endorsement be any more simplistic or dishonest?

Readers should not stand to have their intelligences so outrageously insulted. The most compelling inaccuracy, by far, is as cringe-worthy as it is laughable. The board informs us that Sen. Elizabeth Dole lacks an "issues" section to her Web site (a facetious and capricious claim). Clearly, the board's recent blunder was a combination of lazy, deceitful and otherwise unconcerned fact-checking. Dole does discuss her "issues" positions, though the board refuses to take an occasion to notice that the senator, true to form, lists her positions under a tab labeled "accomplishments"-a tab which perhaps this board is unwilling to read into, or selective enough to ignore wholesale.

In this revealing slip, The Chronicle captures the superficiality of their endorsement process. The senator's "accomplishments" speak for themselves.

Should I even suggest the possibility that this argument turns in on itself: that Hagan lacks an "accomplishments" tab to which she should aspire. In the spirit of such comedy, I ask, how many editorial board members does it take to navigate Dole's campaign Web site? The apparent answer: more than 13.

Among the board's claims against Dole, the most unbelievable is its assertion that the "Senator sat on the sidelines as Wall Street. plunged the economy into crisis." This is utterly false. When it comes to the recent Wall Street bailout, it was Hagan who remained silent and "inert." The News and Observer's Rob Christensen seems to agree here, as "Hagan. refused to commit [or even comment], saying she didn't want a rush to judgment. At 5:13 p.m. Wednesday, Republican incumbent Elizabeth Dole sent out a release saying she would vote against the bailout" and stand up to the insiders and lobbyists.

Hagan's opinion to the media "followed at 10:16 p.m.," 54 minutes after the Senate vote itself... too little, too late.

Uninformed board members, why the hype and misinformation? When it comes to Hagan, the emperor (or, rather the empress) has no clothes.